There are always far too many campaigns in progress on Animal Webaction, which leads to failures. However, this problem is not specific to Animal Webaction but to all animal welfare organisations: the means to assist are unfortunately constantly lower than the incoming requests for help.
One solution would be to reduce the amount of campaigns by refusing to process part of the requests received. If this solution might seem attractive at first, we believe that it is in fact a very poor option. To refuse a campaign means to condemn the animal that has been rejected, for the following reasons:
- the rejected animal will have no chance of receiving help on our platform since its campaign will not have been published, it is as if its campaign failed without even having been launched
- the rejected animal will have no chance of receiving help outside our platform since no Internet user will have been informed of its situation
The first mission of Animal Webaction is to report animals in need. This mission is successfully accomplished despite the failure of the campaign. Thanks to this report, many Internet users get involved to send some help directly to the animal, a support that it would never have been able to benefit from without appearing on our platform.
The current system is certainly not perfect, a failed campaign is always bad news, but reducing the amount of campaigns will have exactly the opposite effect than expected, leaving more animals without any help.